Advertisement

Pediatric Radiology

, Volume 47, Issue 13, pp 1730–1736 | Cite as

Pediatric providers and radiology examinations: knowledge and comfort levels regarding ionizing radiation and potential complications of imaging

  • Benjamin Wildman-TobrinerEmail author
  • Victoria M. Parente
  • Charles M. Maxfield
Original Article

Abstract

Background

Pediatric providers should understand the basic risks of the diagnostic imaging tests they order and comfortably discuss those risks with parents. Appreciating providers’ level of understanding is important to guide discussions and enhance relationships between radiologists and pediatric referrers.

Objective

To assess pediatric provider knowledge of diagnostic imaging modalities that use ionizing radiation and to understand provider concerns about risks of imaging.

Materials and methods

A 6-question survey was sent via email to 390 pediatric providers (faculty, trainees and midlevel providers) from a single academic institution. A knowledge-based question asked providers to identify which radiology modalities use ionizing radiation. Subjective questions asked providers about discussions with parents, consultations with radiologists, and complications of imaging studies.

Results

One hundred sixty-nine pediatric providers (43.3% response rate) completed the survey. Greater than 90% of responding providers correctly identified computed tomography (CT), fluoroscopy and radiography as modalities that use ionizing radiation, and ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as modalities that do not. Fewer (66.9% correct, P<0.001) knew that nuclear medicine utilizes ionizing radiation. A majority of providers (82.2%) believed that discussions with radiologists regarding ionizing radiation were helpful, but 39.6% said they rarely had time to do so. Providers were more concerned with complications of sedation and cost than they were with radiation-induced cancer, renal failure or anaphylaxis.

Conclusion

Providers at our academic referral center have a high level of basic knowledge regarding modalities that use ionizing radiation, but they are less aware of ionizing radiation use in nuclear medicine studies. They find discussions with radiologists helpful and are concerned about complications of sedation and cost.

Keywords

Children Imaging Pediatric radiology Physicians Radiation Risk Survey 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflicts of interest

None

References

  1. 1.
    Dorfman AL, Fazel R, Einstein AJ et al (2011) Use of medical imaging procedures with ionizing radiation in children: a population-based study. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 165:458–464CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Frush DP, Applegate K (2004) Computed tomography and radiation: understanding the issues. J Am Coll Radiol 1:113–119CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Miglioretti DL, Johnson E, Williams A et al (2013) The use of computed tomography in pediatrics and the associated radiation exposure and estimated cancer risk. JAMA Pediatr 167:700–707CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wachtel RE, Dexter F, Dow AJ (2009) Growth rates in pediatric diagnostic imaging and sedation. Anesth Analg 108:1616–1621CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cohen MD (2015) ALARA, image gently and CT-induced cancer. Pediatr Radiol 45:465–470CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Slovis TL (2002) The ALARA concept in pediatric CT: myth or reality? Radiology 223:5–6CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Al-Rammah TY (2016) CT radiation dose awareness among paediatricians. Ital J Pediatr 42:77CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Azmoonfar R, Faghirnavaz H, Younesi H et al (2016) Physicians’ knowledge about radiation dose in radiological investigation in Iran. J Biomed Phys Eng 6:285–288PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Famurewa OC, Obiajunwa PO, Elusiyan JB, Ibitoye BO (2014) Radiation dose and radiation protection principle awareness: a survey among Nigerian paediatricians. Niger Postgrad Med J 21:28–33PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lee CI, Haims AH, Monico EP et al (2004) Diagnostic CT scans: assessment of patient, physician, and radiologist awareness of radiation dose and possible risks. Radiology 231:393–398CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lee RK, Chu WC, Graham CA et al (2012) Knowledge of radiation exposure in common radiological investigations: a comparison between radiologists and non-radiologists. Emerg Med J 29:306–308CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jacob K, Vivian G, Steel JR (2004) X-ray dose training: are we exposed to enough? Clin Radiol 59:928–934 discussion 926-927CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ditkofsky N, Shekhani HN, Cloutier M et al (2016) Ionizing radiation knowledge among emergency department providers. J Am Coll Radiol 13:1044–1049 e1041CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Eksioglu AS, Uner C (2012) Pediatricians’ awareness of diagnostic medical radiation effects and doses: are the latest efforts paying off? Diagn Interv Radiol 18:78–86PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Thomas KE, Parnell-Parmley JE, Haidar S et al (2006) Assessment of radiation dose awareness among pediatricians. Pediatr Radiol 36:823–832CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Uri IF (2012) Lack of radiation awareness among referrers: implications and possible solutions. Int J Clin Pract 66:574–581CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rice HE, Frush DP, Farmer D et al (2007) Review of radiation risks from computed tomography: essentials for the pediatric surgeon. J Pediatr Surg 42:603–607CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Guillerman RP (2014) From ‘Image Gently’ to image intelligently: a personalized perspective on diagnostic radiation risk. Pediatr Radiol 44:444–449CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Trakhtenbroit M, Abdollahian D, Horton KM, Johnson PT (2016) Choosing wisely and imaging 3.0 professional development: radiology resident consultant service. J Am Coll Radiol 13:730–732CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Pearce MS, Salotti JA, Little MP et al (2012) Radiation exposure from CT scans in childhood and subsequent risk of leukaemia and brain tumours: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet 380:499–505CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    American Association of Physicists in Medicine (2011) AAPM position statement on radiation risks from medical imaging procedures. https://www.aapm.org/org/policies/details.asp?id=318&type=PP. Accessed 8 June 2017
  22. 22.
    American Association of Physicists in Medicine (2008) AAPM task group 23: the measurement, reporting, and management of radiation dose in CT. https://aapm.org/pubs/reports/detail.asp?docid=97. Accessed 14 Aug 2017
  23. 23.
    Feinendegen LE, Pollycove M (2001) Biologic responses to low doses of ionizing radiation: detriment versus hormesis. Part 1. Dose responses of cells and tissues. J Nucl Med 42:17N–27NPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Pollycove M, Feinendegen LE (2001) Biologic responses to low doses of ionizing radiation: detriment versus hormesis. Part 2. Dose responses of organisms. J Nucl Med 42:26N-32N, 37NPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Cravero JP, Blike GT, Beach M et al (2006) Incidence and nature of adverse events during pediatric sedation/anesthesia for procedures outside the operating room: report from the pediatric sedation research consortium. Pediatrics 118:1087–1096CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Dillman JR, Ellis JH, Cohan RH et al (2007) Frequency and severity of acute allergic-like reactions to gadolinium-containing i.v. contrast media in children and adults. AJR Am J Roentgenol 189:1533–1538CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Gooding CA, Berdon WE, Brodeur AE, Rowen M (1975) Adverse reactions to intravenous pyelography in children. Am J Roentgenol Radium Ther Nucl Med 123:802–804CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sun LS, Li G, Miller TL et al (2016) Association between a single general anesthesia exposure before age 36 months and neurocognitive outcomes in later childhood. JAMA 315:2312–2320CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Dillman JR (2013) Update on contrast material use in children. http://www.pedrad.org/portals/5/events/2013/dillmancontrast.pdf. Accessed 27 March 2017

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of RadiologyDuke University HospitalDurhamUSA
  2. 2.Department of PediatricsDuke University HospitalDurhamUSA

Personalised recommendations